Walking for Life Educational Corner

Letter to the Editor

Dear Editor,

I'm writing this letter in reference to the Wisdom of Wellness column that you published a few weeks ago. The article was about cord blood banking (June 23 issue). Carol Klingsmith's daughter has banked the cord blood from her last baby. The baby, Brett, is a very fortunate child. If he ever needs stem cells, he will have a perfect match.

I understand that this can be a very costly procedure, and many would not be able to afford it. But did you know that you can donate the cord blood and placenta to a community bank at no cost to you? This can then be used to help others in need of a transplant.

Many hospitals ask at the time of birth if you would be willing to do this. This is a form of Adult Stem Cells and does not cause any harm to the donor. If your hospital doesn't ask you, then you ask them.

One of our daughters has a friend who is expecting a baby, and her father has heart problems. She is donating the cord blood from her baby to see if it can help her father. What a great gift from a grandchild!

It seems to me that this is where our money should go. Put more money into Adult Stem Cell research -which we know will work, instead of Embryonic Stem Cell research - which takes the life of the embryo.

Respectfully,
Norma Clark

Letter to the Editor
	Dear Editor, Stem cell research has been a highly debated topic in recent months that stirs up strong emotions and opinions on both sides. However, when debating this, it is important to study the facts and put opinions aside. First, there are two types of stem cell research - adult and embryonic. Adult stem cells can be taken from the umbilical cord blood and bone marrow cells. Some medical cures have been found utilizing adult stem cells. In embryonic stem cell research (ESCR), a five to seven day human embryo is used to harvest these stem cells. The embryo is lost or killed in the process. Those who favor this (embryonic) type of research will argue that this embryo is not human; that it is just a microscopic blob of cells. However, in about 30 days this blob of cells will have a heartbeat, and eight months later it is able to laugh and cry. Others may argue that this human embryo is not alive, but the medical community classifies pregnancies that are lost in the first month as early embryonic death. Therefore, this human embryo is alive at the beginning of the research and it is dead after the stem cells are harvested. So, alive is alive and dead is dead. That's the facts. There are two different sources for these embryos. The first source is embryos that have been frozen in fertility clinics. Some will argue that these embryos serve no purpose for human life and are a prime candidate for research. However, couples have adopted these embryos. Some of these embryos will not survive the transplanting, and some will result in the birth of healthy children. The other source of human embryos is somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) or cloning. In this case, a woman donates an egg. The nucleus of that egg is removed and replaced with the nucleus of a somatic cell, such as a skin cell. This cell is then stimulated and cellular division will begin, and a in five to seven days a healthy embryo is formed. This embryo is the exact genetic clone of the somatic cell donor. At this stage the embryo is killed to harvest the stem cells. However, this embryo is able to be transplanted into a surrogate mother that could result in the birth of a human clone. Proponents of ESCR say that SCNT is not cloning. The fact is, it is cloning the embryo that is simply killed and not allowed to mature in its natural environment. Please don't feel that we are cold to the feelings of those suffering from chronic debilitating disease or injuries. We should continue to work and pray for cures to these conditions and pray and support those who are suffering. Doctors and scientists have the responsibilities to conduct research ethically and to hold it to a high moral standard. Research that results in the end of human life, even at the embryonic stage, is morally and ethically wrong. That is a fact and not an opinion. Respectfully submitted, Todd & Darlene Gordon

To Whom It May Concern:

I feel that it is time to give a few facts about stem cell research. There are two kinds of stem cells -- embryonic and adult.

First, we will talk about adult stem cells. You hear very little about them. These stem cells come from your own body and can be used by you without any chance of rejection. They are found in bone marrow, umbilical cord blood, the mouth and nose, baby teeth and fat cells. With these stem cells, successful therapies have already been developed for Parkinson's Disease, heart damage, spinal cord injury, cancer, blindness, juvenile diabetes and more. Why doesn't the media talk about this?

Embryonic stem cells are taken from developing embryos, and in order to harvest them, the embryos are destroyed. A human embryo is the earliest stage of human life. They have the human DNA, so they are human.

Many people think that these embryos are all to come from the frozen embryos left at vitro fertilization clinics and they will be destroyed anyway -- so what's the big deal. Because of the death penalty, people on death row will be destroyed, too, but we don't experiment on them. Why shouldn't our smallest human receive the same respect?

A way to save these embryos is for them to become 'Snowflake Babies'. These are embryos that are adopted by couples that cannot have children. They are implanted into the mother's uterus and grow until birth. Eighty-four couples have adopted embryos in this country.

Embryos can also be cloned. The cloned embryo is allowed to live for five to seven days. Then it is destroyed and the stem cell is used to treat the donor. This embryo also has human DNA and is a human being. Do we really want to kill one human in order to MAYBE cure another? As far as we know, this has never been tried on humans -- in the U.S. After 20 years of research with embryonic stem cells, there has been no success.

We have two petitions floating around at this time for our signature. One is asking the United States Senate to pass a bill to ban all human cloning. The House has already passed it. I feel that we need to sign this one.

The other is from the State of Missouri wanting to pass a constitutional amendment to allow embryonic stem cell research and cloning in Missouri. This is being backed by the governor and several other well-known people. We don't need to sign this petition. They need 150,000 signatures to get this on the ballot in November. Do we really want Missouri to be one of the first states to OK cloning?

My heart goes out to the people with these terrible diseases -- we have some in our own family. But is embryonic stem cell research really the answer? To clone one human embryo, you need at least one egg, and the National Academy of Science published an article last year estimating that it would probably take 100 eggs for reach person. They also stated that there were more than 100 million Americans alone who could benefit from stem cell therapy. If that is true, we would need 10 billion eggs -- just in America. Where would we get that many eggs?

At the present time, women sell their eggs for $1,000 to $2,000 each. I'm sure that if the demand for eggs went up, so would the price. That would be just the cost of the eggs, not the doctors, hospitals, etc. Sounds like something for the very rich.

Why not put this money into something that has proven itself? Adult stem cells do not harm the donor. They are morally accepted by everyone, and they could be something to help many people.

Sincerely,

Norma Clark